Research–Practice Partnership in Mental Health: Lessons from Participants

Garland, Ann F.; Plemmons, Dena; Koontz, Leita

doi:10.1007/s10488-006-0062-2

Cited by 63 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Being able to help shape research questions is an important activity for some practitioners. 155 Competing agendas and priorities between partners can be a barrier to success 156,157 and need acknowledging and managing. 114,155,156,158,159 Academics and commissioners alike have recognised deficiencies in the communication of research findings across boundaries.…”

Section: Content Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…155 Competing agendas and priorities between partners can be a barrier to success 156,157 and need acknowledging and managing. 114,155,156,158,159 Academics and commissioners alike have recognised deficiencies in the communication of research findings across boundaries. Researchers felt they should be involved more closely in the calls for research proposals; commissioners were more concerned that the users of research -policy colleagues and public service managers -should be involved more closely to ensure prioritisation of practical over academic concerns.…”

Section: Content Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,41,42,152,155,163,167 Roles can take time to be established, and may take on different forms based on specific local organisations. 137,168 One reason given for the success of the CQRS's partnership programme was that participants were expected to show measurable results.…”

Section: Process Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…137,152,156,159,175 Partnerships need people to attend meetings. 152,155 Bartunek et al 75 suggest a number of physical links between the two communities -web-based discussion boards, practice-focused meetings and conferences. Baumbusch et al 91 explain how project meetings were used to feed back emerging findings for practitioners to action, and for practitioners to provide context that would assist interpretation of the findings.…”

Section: Process Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…179,[181][182][183] Mutual trust and respect are frequently reported as enablers. 74,91,114,155,158,175 The issues of trust and reciprocity feature prominently in the management literature on planned collaborations. 184,185 Other reported beneficial dispositions include clinical credibility, being known and having a good reputation 60,186 and having good knowledge of the organisation's culture.…”

Section: Individual Dispositionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study

Bullock

Barnes

Morris³

et al. 2016

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundKnowledge and innovation transfer (KIT) is recognised internationally as a complex, dynamic process that is difficult to embed in organisations. There is growing use of health service–academic–industry collaborations in the UK, with knowledge brokers linking producers with the users of knowledge and innovation.AimFocusing on KIT ‘agent’ roles within Academic Health Science Networks in England and Partnerships in Wales, we show how individual dispositions, processes and content contribute to desired outcomes.MethodsWe studied the KIT intentions of all Academic Health Science Networks in England, and the South East Wales Academic Health Science Partnership. Using a qualitative case study design, we studied the work of 13 KIT agents purposively sampled from five networks, by collecting data from observation of meetings, documentation, KIT agent audio-diaries, and semistructured interviews with KIT agents, their line managers and those they supported (‘Links’). We also used a consensus method in a meeting of experts (nominal group technique) to discuss the measurement of outcomes of KIT agent activity.FindingsThe case study KIT agents were predominantly from a clinical background with differing levels of experience and expertise, with the shared aim of improving services and patient care. Although outside of recognised career structures, the flexibility afforded to KIT agents to define their role was an enabler of success. Other helpful factors included (1) time and resources to devote to KIT activity; (2) line manager support and a team to assist in the work; and (3) access and the means to use data for improvement projects. The organisational and political context could be challenging. KIT agents not only tackled local barriers such as siloed working, but also navigated shifting regional and national policies. Board-level support for knowledge mobilisation together with a culture of reflection (listening to front-line staff), openness to challenges and receptivity to research all enabled KIT agents to achieve desired outcomes. Nominal group findings underscored the importance of relating measures to specific intended outcomes. However, the case studies highlighted that few measures were employed by KIT agents and their managers. Using social marketing theory helped to show linkages between processes, outcomes and impact, and drew attention to how KIT agents developed insight into their clients’ needs and tailored work accordingly.LimitationsLevel of KIT agent participation varied; line managers and Links were interviewed only once; and outcomes were self-reported.ConclusionsSocial marketing theory provided a framework for analysing KIT agent activity. The preparatory work KIT agents do in listening, understanding local context and building relationships enabled them to develop ‘insight’ and adapt their ‘offer’ to clients to achieve desired outcomes.Future workThe complexity of the role and the environment in which it is played out justifies more research on KIT agents. Suggestions include (1) longitudinal study of career pathways; (2) how roles are negotiated within teams and how competing priorities are managed; (3) how success is measured; (4) the place of improvement methodologies within KIT work; (5) the application of social marketing theory to comparative study of similar roles; and (6) patients as KIT agents.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

Section: Content Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Content Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Process Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Process Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Individual Dispositionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study

Bullock

Barnes

Morris³

et al. 2016

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Building a Research‐community Collaborative to Improve Community Care for Infants and Toddlers At‐risk for Autism Spectrum Disorders

Brookman‐Frazee

Stahmer

Lewis

et al. 2012

Journal Community Psychology

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes the formation and initial outcomes of a research-community collaborative group that was developed based on community-based participatory research principles. The group includes a transdisciplinary team of practitioners, funding agency representatives, researchers, and families of children with autism spectrum disorders, who partnered to improve community-based care for infants and toddlers at risk for autism through the implementation of evidence-based practices. Data from this group provide support for the feasibility of developing and sustaining a highly synergistic and productive research-community collaborative group who shares common goals to improve community care.

show abstract

Therapists’ Attitudes Towards Psychotherapeutic Strategies in Community-Based Psychotherapy with Children with Disruptive Behavior Problems

Brookman‐Frazee

Garland

Taylor

et al. 2008

Adm Policy Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about what individual treatment strategies therapists providing usual care psychotherapy consider the most valuable to their practice. The Therapeutic Strategies Survey (TSS) assesses therapists' attitudes about the value of 27 individual treatment strategies in their practice with children with disruptive behavior problems in community-based outpatient psychotherapy. Findings indicate that therapists from multiple professional disciplines highly value many individual psychotherapeutic strategies, and consider strategies common to a majority of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for this population at least as important as strategies not emphasized in EBPs. Implications for developing therapist training and implementation of EBPs are discussed.

show abstract

Research–Practice Partnership in Mental Health: Lessons from Participants

Cited by 63 publications

References 23 publications

Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study

Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study

Building a Research‐community Collaborative to Improve Community Care for Infants and Toddlers At‐risk for Autism Spectrum Disorders

Therapists’ Attitudes Towards Psychotherapeutic Strategies in Community-Based Psychotherapy with Children with Disruptive Behavior Problems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About